- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 14:46:55 +1000
- To: public-svg-wg@w3.org
Cameron McCormack: > * Experiment on alternate SVG path syntax for better EXI compression > http://www.w3.org/mid/20090529175108.6F3B.2E34A820@canon.co.jp > http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2050 > > * Native support for Drag & Drop in SVG > http://www.w3.org/mid/1D4C6E01-4D41-4E53-BDB6-96F697797213@mac.com > > * ISSUE-2267: Consider removing SVGEvent > http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2267 > > * Plans for SVG 1.1 test suite, missing test coverage > http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2219 properties > http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2221 attributes > http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2222 elements If we have time, I’d like also to discuss: * Multiple <missing-glyph> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4930 With some preliminary testing, it seems that Batik and WebKit use the first <missing-glyph>, while Opera uses the last. http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/ua-tests/missing-glyph-multiple.svg Choosing the last would be consistent with how duplicated <feFunc[RGBA]> elements are treated, though. What other duplicate element handling functionality do we have in SVG? Thanks, Cameron -- Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Monday, 1 June 2009 05:01:31 UTC